hes been posting on my gambling board for years and a pal of mine knows him ... can anyone be a decent human being trying to blow whistle on the gov w/o being a mole?

call him yourself ... the poor guy just wrote the mich paper and told his story, THEN AJ called him and others ...

you really are myopic when coming to understand that not everyone is a pawn/agent ...

your site and views are not even worth considering bc you miss the point ... is wingtv still manned by agents??? I know them both personally, and you missed the mark on them too BIG TIME ...

anyhow, done repeatng myself on your paranoia

That's really good information ... I think you said you were done posting here a while ago ... hmm ... certainly a small world you travel in ... bet you also play golf with AJ ... coincidence I'm sure ...

Here's an account of the reaction in China
to the US missile sales to Taiwan.

Bear in mind that in the immediate aftermath of
international incidents, the publicly reported sentiments
within China, do tend to be a bit hysterical:

Quote:

China’s hawks demand cold war on the US

February 7, 2010

MORE than half of Chinese people questioned in a poll believe China and America are heading for a new “cold war”.

The finding came after battles over Taiwan, Tibet, trade, climate change, internet freedom and human rights which have poisoned relations in the three months since President Barack Obama made a fruitless visit to Beijing.

According to diplomatic sources, a rancorous postmortem examination is under way inside the US government, led by officials who think the president was badly advised and was made to appear weak.

In China’s eyes, the American response — which includes a pledge by Obama to get tougher on trade — is a reaction against its rising power.

Now almost 55% of those questioned for Global Times, a state-run newspaper, agree that “a cold war will break out between the US and China”.

An independent survey of Chinese-language media for The Sunday Times has found army and navy officers predicting a military showdown and political leaders calling for China to sell more arms to America’s foes. The trigger for their fury was Obama’s decision to sell $6.4 billion (£4 billion) worth of weapons to Taiwan, the thriving democratic island that has ruled itself since 1949.

“We should retaliate with an eye for an eye and sell arms to Iran, North Korea, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela,” declared Liu Menxiong, a member of the Chinese people’s political consultative conference.

He added: “We have nothing to be afraid of. The North Koreans have stood up to America and has anything happened to them? No. Iran stands up to America and does disaster befall it? No.”

Officially, China has reacted by threatening sanctions against American companies selling arms to Taiwan and cancelling military visits.

But Chinese analysts think the leadership, riding a wave of patriotism as the year of the tiger dawns, may go further.

“This time China must punish the US,” said Major-General Yang Yi, a naval officer. “We must make them hurt.” A major-general in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Luo Yuan, told a television audience that more missiles would be deployed against Taiwan. And a PLA strategist, Colonel Meng Xianging, said China would “qualitatively upgrade” its military over the next 10 years to force a showdown “when we’re strong enough for a hand-to-hand fight with the US”.

Chinese indignation was compounded when the White House said Obama would meet the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet, in the next few weeks.

“When someone spits on you, you have to get back,” said Huang Xiangyang, a commentator in the China Daily newspaper, usually seen as a showcase for moderate opinion.

An internal publication at the elite Qinghua University last week predicted the strains would get worse because “core interests” were at risk. It said battles over exports, technology transfer, copyright piracy and the value of China’s currency, the yuan, would be fierce.

As a crescendo of strident nationalistic rhetoric swirls through the Chinese media and blogosphere, American officials seem baffled by what has gone wrong and how fast it has happened.

During Obama’s visit, the US ambassador to China, Jon Huntsman, claimed relations were “really at an all-time high in terms of the bilateral atmosphere ... a cruising altitude that is higher than any other time in recent memory”, according to an official transcript.

The ambassador must have been the only person at his embassy to think so, said a diplomat close to the talks.

“The truth was that the atmosphere was cold and intransigent when the president went to Beijing yet his China team went on pretending that everything was fine,” the diplomat said.

In reality, Chinese officials argued over every item of protocol, rigged a town hall meeting with a pre-selected audience, censored the only interview Obama gave to a Chinese newspaper and forbade the Americans to use their own helicopters to fly him to the Great Wall.

President Hu Jintao refused to give an inch on Obama’s plea to raise the value of the Chinese currency, while his vague promises of co-operation on climate change led the Americans to blunder into a fiasco at the Copenhagen summit three weeks later.

Diplomats say they have been told that there was “frigid” personal chemistry between Obama and the Chinese president, with none of the superficial friendship struck up by previous leaders of the two nations.

Yet after their meeting Obama’s China adviser, Jeff Bader, said: “It’s been highly successful in setting out and accomplishing the objectives we set ourselves.”

Then came Copenhagen, where Obama virtually had to force his way with his bodyguards into a conference room where the urbane Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, was trying to strike a deal behind his back.

The Americans were also livid at what they saw as deliberate Chinese attempts to humiliate the president by sending lower-level officials to deal with him.

“They thought Obama was weak and they were testing him,” said a European diplomat based in China.

In Beijing, some diplomats even claim to detect a condescending attitude towards Obama, noting that Yang Jiechi, the foreign minister, prides himself on knowing the Bush dynasty and others among America’s traditional white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant elite.

But there are a few voices urging caution on Chinese public opinion. “China will look unreal if it behaves aggressively and competes for global leadership,” wrote Wang Yusheng, a retired diplomat, in the China Daily.

He warned that China was not as rich or as powerful as America or Japan and therefore such a move could be “hazardous”.

Despite the hard-line opinions in the above report, Hu Jintao is likely
to be pragmatic and calculating in handling confrontation with the US.

But he will go with the hard-line tide a little, because he does not want
to give his right-wing political opponents any reason to criticize him,
especially as he has the upper hand now over the "Shanghai Gang".

Here's a good overview of what's been
going on behind the scenes:

Quote:

Signs from Shanghai

February 1, 2010 - Sydney Morning Herald

President Hu Jintao surprised Australian diplomats by turning up with four hours' notice to the Australian pavilion at the Shanghai Expo 10 days ago.

Close Chinese observers saw something significant:
"It's now safe for Hu Jintao to go to Shanghai."

Amazingly, Hu had not been publicly seen in Shanghai for at least two years. In fact, I can't find reports of Hu passing through China's most glamorous city since June 2006. That's akin to Barack Obama governing America sans New York, or Kevin Rudd micro-managing Australia without touching down in Sydney.

In the closet warfare of Chinese elite politics, Shanghai has been the political bastion of Hu Jintao's predecessor and nemesis, Jiang Zemin. Hu's arrival in Shanghai was seen to symbolise that he is getting the upper hand in his war of attrition against Jiang's "Shanghai Gang".

To over-simplify, Hu's key proteges are associated with the China Youth League and a more liberal, egalitarian and intellectual outlook, while Jiang's proteges are more closely linked with the security, propaganda and military apparatus, as well as strategic state-owned companies, particularly oil. More importantly, when China's elite are divided, they tend to make doubly sure the rest of the country is locked down.

If Hu's apparent confidence is well-placed, it explains some other signs that suggest the recent political freeze may not be forever.

First is the re-emergence of the super-educated and one-time student leader, Vice-Premier Li Keqiang.

Li was Hu Jintao's chosen heir until Jiang interrupted those succession plans in September 2007. Li seemed in political trouble as recently as July. But since the last key Communist Party Central Committee meeting in September he has been everywhere (as has another of Hu's once-wounded allies, Premier Wen Jiabao). Li is obviously in line for future premier, or maybe one step higher.

Li's speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday was more conciliatory and made more sense than anything we've seen recently from a Chinese leader in the international arena. It was all about China's need to correct its own economic imbalances, rather than dancing on the grave of the US-led global financial order, and co-operation on a slew of global challenges. The significance of Li's speech lies not so much in what he said, but that the internal politics permitted him to say it.

Equally significant was the announcement of a new energy policy body, which strengthened Li's standing just before he took the stage at Davos. Until now, Chinese energy policy has been notoriously captured by vested interests, particularly those associated with state-owned behemoth Petrochina and the People's Liberation Army.

Although the new National Energy Commission lacks any teeth, two things are notable. First, its formation had been on hold - some would say the whole country has been on hold, including the next leadership transition - while Hu pushed some of Jiang's acolytes out of the Central Military Commission and replaced them with his own. (Some say the new line-up to control the People's Liberation Army has now been settled; others caution that nothing is settled until it is publicly announced.)

Second, the new energy commission is stacked with liberally oriented policymakers and Hu's men (the two categories are not the same but substantially overlap). At the head of the commission is Wen Jiabao, followed by Li Keqiang. It includes Li's underling You Quan, leaders of the National Development and Reform Commission who work easily with Hu (Zhang Ping and Zhang Guobao) as well as market-oriented policymakers like Zhou Xiaochuan (head of the central bank) and Liu Mingkang (the banking regulator).

Nowhere to be seen is Xie Zhenhua, who is in charge of climate change policy at the development and reform commission. Xie is internationally respected for his grasp of climate change policy. But he also owes his previous political resurrection (after a massive Petrochina oil spill) to the Shanghai Gang. And it was his finger-pointing outburst at President Obama behind closed doors at Copenhagen that arguably did more than any other single recent event to turn Western opinion away from engaging China to fearing it.

Another notable absentee is Wang Qishan. Wang is an able internationalist who is widely known and respected in the West. But he has also been trampling over the economic policy turf that some thought was supposed to be reserved for Li Keqiang.

Gone from the formal energy policy scene is Jiang crony Zhang Dejiang, who was meant to be in charge of energy policy in the State Council. Zhang has been wounded by a recent corruption probe into Shenzhen Airlines, according to a source with connections with the Central Discipline & Inspection Commission. Indeed, it seems most of the top-level corruption scalps over the past year link back towards Jiang in one way or another.

Events since the Tibetan uprising in March 2008 have shown it was naive to assume China is on a slow but inexorable march towards a more liberal political system and more co-operative international outlook. But it would be equally wrong to assume China's recent political hardening - which spilled into the international arena with the arrest of Stern Hu, aggressive diplomacy at Copenhagen and cyber attacks on leading American companies such as Google - marks a new inexorable trend.

Hu Jintao is no Mikhail Gorbachev and China is hardly on the brink of a glasnost moment. But its future possibilities remain wide open. And they hinge, in part, on the battle for Shanghai.

Real estate, stocks, credit. China sure has its share of bubbles. Oddly, little attention is paid to the biggest one of all.

China’s currency reserves grew by more than the gross domestic product of Norway in 2009. Its $2.4 trillion of reserves is a bubble all its own, one growing before our eyes with nary a peep out of those searching for the next big one.

The reserve bubble is actually an Asia-wide phenomenon. And we should stop viewing this monetary arms race as a source of strength. Here are three reasons why it’s fast becoming a bigger liability than policy makers say publicly.

One, it’s a massive and growing pyramid scheme. The issue has reached new levels of absurdity with traders buzzing about crisis-plagued Greece seeking a Chinese bailout. After all, if economies were for sale, China could use the $453 billion of reserves it amassed last year to buy Greece and Vietnam and have enough left over for Mongolia.

Countries such as the U.S. used to woo the Bill Grosses of the world to buy their debt. Now they are wooing governments. Gross, who runs the world’s biggest mutual fund at Pacific Investment Management Co., is still plenty important to officials in Washington. He’s just not as vital as the continued patronage of state asset managers in places like Beijing.

Yeah China does have a mountain of foreign currency.
And has bubbles in various sectors of the economy.

But that currency stash is not a bubble - it's earned surplus
from China's trading. And the internal economic bubbles are
not as precarious as they look --because China has very firm
control of control banking and investment, merely by edict.

That Chinese coal deal with Australia is testimony to the
potential of Australia's future. The country is sitting on
absolutely vast natural resources. No wonder the NWO
have always worked hard to control it._________________Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.

It's a standing joke that PIMCO are the fourth branch of
the US government, due to the bond-king's US deals.

PIMCO is actually a subsidiary of German financial giant Allianz.

Back in December, 2009 a senior PIMCO manager, Changhong Zhu was
hired by China as its Chief Investment Officer, to oversee the investment
of the portion of China's vast $3 trillion of foreign currency reserves
managed by their State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE).

Then a couple of days ago, the Asia Times reported that China's
Communist Party had ordered the new boss of SAFE (and China's top
commercial banks) to buy no more US corporate debt or asset-
backed securities. And to buy no more US state and municipal debt.

Quote:

China Dumps US Asset-Backed's and Corporates

February 9th, 2010 - By David Goldman

Dollar-denominated risk assets, including asset-backed securities and corporates, are no longer wanted at the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), nor at China’s large commercial banks.

The Chinese government has ordered its reserve managers to divest itself of riskier securities and hold only Treasuries and US agency debt with an implicit or explicit government guarantee. This already has been communicated to American securities dealers, according to market participants with direct knowledge of the events.

It is not clear whether China’s motive is simple risk aversion in the wake of a sharp widening of corporate and mortgage spreads during the past two weeks, or whether there also is a political dimension.....

There is some speculation that China’s action has to do with the recent deterioration of US-Chinese relations over arm sales to Taiwan and other issues. That would be an unusual action for the Chinese to take–Beijing does not mix investment and strategic policy.....

The UK Telegraph's Ambrose Evans-Pritchard picked up on
the Asia Times report and teased out some implications:

Quote:

A Communist Party directive leaked to the Chinese-language edition of the Asia Times said dollar reserves should be limited to US Treasuries or agency mortgage debt such as Freddie Mac that enjoys Washington's implicit backing.

BNP Paribas said the move has major implications for global risk assets. "The message from Beijing is that we don't like this environment,"
said Hans Redeker, the bank's currency chief.

"When the world's biggest investor turns risk-averse, that is something you take notice of. We think this could become the new theme for the markets in the medium-term," he said......

Neither the Telegraph nor the Asia Times expound in any detail on the
possibility that this is a new phase of the undeclared political and
economic war between China and the US. The one which erupted
when the Wall Street Scams totalled the global economy, and which saw
its first public view when Wen Jaibo forged an alliance at Copenhagen
with India, Brazil and South Africa -and deliberately snubbed Obama.

All this is a far cry from the halcyon days of 2008 when the very same
China State Administration of Foreign Exchange was pumping $2.5 Billion
into the Goldman Sachs-linked, Atlantic City, TPG Fund. The same outfit
which got John Corizine in trouble last September '09:

Quote:

TPG-Axon was launched in February 2005 as a $2.8 billion joint venture between TPG and Dinakar Singh, a former top trader at Goldman Sachs who worked under Corzine. Before entering politics, Corzine was the chief executive of Goldman in the 1990s. Link

So, maybe the Chinese are cleaning house at SAFE, having appointed
Changhong Zhu as a safe pair of hands with no financial blood on them.

Now....... cutting to the chase:
The new Chinese policy means that
China won't be bailing out California.

I believe it is the first big conflict of this century. Obama’s government zeroed-in on trade relation with China since its inauguration, and it took this long until it had its first opportunity to gather the forces in preparation for an all-out assault. The export doubling initiative is part of if, Obama’s escalating rhetoric on the RMB exchange rate is part of it, and the rising tide of US trade sanctions against Chinese goods is part of it.

China is not Japan, and the RMB could not be pushed around like the Japanese yen in 1987. In the last China-EU economic summit late last year, Wen Jiabao stated clearly that the west’s demand for the RMB to revalue is fundamentally unfair, and if the RMB is to revaluse, it has to be orderly, and gradually.

Since it’s unlikely the US could double its export without either another 30% devaluation of the dollar against major world currencies in theory, and the US would not and could not voluntarily weaken the dollar just for the sake of increasing export, so the next plausible thing for Obama to do may be to force the RMB to revalue.

......in order to break out of the economic log jam, it’s quite natural to shift the problem to outside of the US, in particular to China, preferrably. That is the essense of his export doubling initiative. Think who else could take that much more US export year after year?

So one way or another a major confrontation is set to take place between US and China.

But China is clearly doing its thing quietly: its trade surplus continued to shrink to $14.2 billion. Its January import rose 90% year-over-year. With its trade surplus vs the US hovering around $20 billion, it seems China has worked to maintain a trade deficit with the rest of the world.

I believe the show down would ultimately go down the same path as Copenhagen: that China would move quickly to the high ground, neutralize Obama’s hand, and increase its advantage, but hope to eventually reach a so-called win-win compromise of sorts.

That Chinese coal deal with Australia is testimony to the
potential of Australia's future. The country is sitting on
absolutely vast natural resources. No wonder the NWO
have always worked hard to control it.

I read this and was hoping you may be able to elaborate and go into a little more depth on the 'how'.
I am very keen on this as it may help me deal with the 99% of people that think im a 'fruit loop'!!
Thanks cobber.